State v. Allen, 140 Conn. App. 423

Victim and her mother and sister moved in with Allen in Connecticut around 1999 when the victim was six or seven.
Beginning in 2000, multiple sexual acts were alleged by the victim, including touching, vibrator use, and oral sex, described across several incidents in Allen’s bedroom.
The incidents escalated to more explicit acts, including penile-vaginal contact and threats by Allen to prevent disclosure.
Allen was charged with three counts of sexual assault in the first degree and three counts of risk of injury to a child, and the jury convicted on all counts except one of each charge.
Allen challenged (1) sufficiency of the evidence, (2) admission of uncharged sexual misconduct evidence, and (3) failure to disclose counseling records after in camera review; the court affirmed.
The trial court imposed an eighteen-year total sentence with thirteen years to serve and ten years of probation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence	Allen argues the victim’s testimony was unreliable and inconsistent with prior statements.	The inconsistencies render guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.	Evidence viewed in light favorable to verdict supports guilt.
Admission of uncharged misconduct	State contends uncharged acts of J.C. show propensity and are admissible under DeJesus and related rulings.	Uncharged acts were dissimilar and prejudicial; gatekeeping and reliability issues defeated admissibility.	Court did not abuse discretion; acts were sufficiently similar and probative with proper instructions.
Pretrial gatekeeping and credibility concerns	J.C.’s testimony helps prove propensity toward similar sexual misconduct.	J.C.’s credibility issues and false reports undermine admissibility.	Gatekeeping proper; credibility issues for jury consideration, not rule denial.
Disclosure of counseling records	Records could be useful for impeaching the victim.	Esposito-Bruno framework requires disclosure if material to confrontation.	Court did not abuse discretion; records sealed and non-useful to defense.

State v. Hedge, 297 Conn. 621 (Conn. 2010) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence on appeal)
State v. DeJesus, 288 Conn. 418 (Conn. 2008) (propensity evidence in sex crime cases; limitations and balancing test)
State v. L.W., 122 Conn. App. 324 (Conn. App. 2010) (similarity and admissibility of uncharged misconduct; limits of prejudice)
State v. Aaron L., 272 Conn. 798 (Conn. 2005) (no requirement of clear and convincing proof before admissibility of prior acts)
State v. Ritrovato, 280 Conn. 36 (Conn. 2006) (gatekeeping and credibility determinations for testimony)
State v. Tozier, 136 Conn. App. 731 (Conn. App. 2012) (Esposito framework and in camera review guidance)
State v. Antonaras, 137 Conn. App. 703 (Conn. App. 2012) (high probative value of prior acts in child molestation cases)
State v. Esposito, 192 Conn. 166 (Conn. 1984) (Esposito-Bruno framework for disclosure of privileged records)
State v. Coccomo, 302 Conn. 664 (Conn. 2011) (standard of review for evidentiary rulings)
State v. Dillard, 132 Conn. App. 414 (Conn. App. 2011) (balancing probative value versus prejudicial effect)